Trump World Grab-Bag--A Collection

Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Eric Cantor's Loss is Something to Think About

You know who I did not expect to lose a primary challenge this season? Right--Eric Cantor. As House majority leader and one of the GOP's "Young Guns", he's been a pretty big deal on the Hill, and so help me, I would have figured he would be safe.

You know who else thought Eric Cantor was certain to win? Eric Cantor's campaign, the internal polling of which had him up over his opponent, David Brat, by 34 points--but Brat bested him 55.4 percent to 44.6 percent. That is pretty damn different. I dunno if he hired Dean Chambers or what. But I do perceive one insect that might have tampered with the balm--former Republican Congressman Ben Jones made a push to have Independents and Democrats vote in the GOP primary with getting rid of Cantor very much in mind. I would love to see an analysis of who voted to see if this made an impact, but other wise, it looks like low turnout helped in Brat's favor. People just weren't going out of their way to vote Cantor.

One thing this does is give the lie to the narrative that the Tea Party is done for--this and the polling for the Mississippi run-off that puts McDaniels up over Cochran suggests that the "Return of the Establishment" isn't necessarily so. But another thing it does is upset the GOP House leadership expectations, that maybe, if John Boehner was of a mind to say "take this job and shove it" with respects to the Speakership (which I've always thought he might be in mind of doing, since it has seemed to me to be a thankless position), that Eric Cantor would naturally be their man. (He was, after all, something of a string-puller, I noted, regarding the budget and debt ceiling deals in 2011. He'd have been a logical choice.)

I honestly don't know that much about David Brat, or whether he has any "Akin-like" tendencies to open mouth-insert foot. And I have a feeling this is probably a safe district for the GOP hopeful regardless, having returned Republicans to Washington so frequently, so lately. But as one of the opposition, I find this turn of events pretty damn interesting. It does make you wonder what other strange upsets might be lurking where the political field isn't really as predictable as we think.

Hi Vixen,I can offer one piece of good advice to you if you wish to understand the repudiation of the RINO Cantor.

And let me preface this insignificant remark by reminding you that I am not trying to be competitive with anyone's opinion here or on Rumproast in any way, shape, or form.

You know I was commenting on Rumproast before you began to post there, and I've seen a lot of the leftist point of view.

If you want to understand the right, even to criticize it, don't try to understand us by comments from the left.

I've read a lot of leftist comments, and I will tell you point blank that you guys really just don't get it.

I have rarely seen a situation in which the left demonstrated that they had any idea of what was going on in the minds of most conservative citizens.

You also can't get it by sampling wonkish Republican Washington opinion pieces.

There is a huge disconnect between Washington Republicans and more conservative Americans. They try to appeal to us on the stump, but their voting records and their Washington coalitions tell a different story. So I will simply say if you really want to understand what is going on in the minds of people who would turn out Cantor, you would have to understand what is going on with conservatives. And if you try to find out by looking at left wing analysis or Washington Republican bubble analysis, you will never even get close.

And I might add, all the shibboleths about the TEA parties is a vastly erroneous way of trying to fathom most conservative opinion, with some of them being a little more activist and connecting with some group.

Find some good right wing sources that speak for the people, and disagree if you wish, but at least you would have a better idea of where we're coming from.

I checked out a lot of reax across the blogosphere, but I think Erick Erickson points out one of the heavy problems with Cantor--where was he? He wrote:

Cantor’s constituent services moved more toward focusing on running the Republican House majority than his congressional district. K Street, the den of Washington lobbyists, became his chief constituency. In Virginia a couple of months ago, several residents of Cantor’s district groused that they were going to support Brat because they did not think Cantor was doing his job as a Virginia congressman. Others no longer trusted him.

This is what a lot of primaries seem to be about, and the occasional push for term limits--the idea that people get to Washington and lose all sense of who sent them there and what they were sent for. It was a good part of the challenges McDaniels leveled at Cochran, too. I think a lot of the opinion pieces I've read concentrate a lot on the immigration issue--I think it came up because it's specifically been in the news lately--but the ways in which Cantor pissed off allies was never about just one issue, it was the cumulative effect of his constituents not being sure where he stood regardless of his voting record, because he came across as out for himself.

What can only be understood by surmise is the level of frustration, anger, and betrayal conservatives feel.

As I have said before, a lot of people interested in politics don't seem to have copped to the fact that the harder you push on one side of the political spectrum, the more you energize the other side. And right now, conservatives are ready for a change.

I don't think the border can be minimized. Those of us who live in border states are only too aware of the tremendous damage and danger that we face by policies that do not protect us from contingent factors relative to illegal immigration.

Atlanta is now a major hub and distribution point for drug cartels. As you know, the Zetas were originally Mexican special forces troops, trained by Americans and lured into employment as an enforcement wing of the Sinaloa cartel.

They decided to go into business for themselves, and now are responsible for more heads being severed from their bodies than Al Qaeda. Sometimes border towns have had to close border crossing stations because of gun battles. We have found hand grenades on our side of the border.

In Arizona, some national parks and other parts of southern Arizona have become territory occupied by drug cartels. They have secret monitoring stations to track law enforcement or hapless citizens who happen to vacation in that area. Citizens are warned against going to southern Arizona. A short time ago, Phoenix was regarded as the kidnap capital of the world.

Many Latinos that we know are afraid to visit their grandparents in Mexico. The cartels hire American gangs to carry out contract hits and torture of American citizens who interfere in their drug trade business.

I could go on and on about this, but suffice it to say that it is a very dangerous situation. And parents are now handing their children over to the coyote wing of these drug cartels with the promise of legal status in the United States. It is a human tragedy.

I really have a hard time with the immigration issue because--well, you know, bleeding heart leftist--I want to take care of the people who are crossing for economic reasons, political persecutions, to make a better life, etc. My own people all came over over a century ago, but my husband's family immigrated from Italy in the last 50 years. I'm sensitive to the reasons why people immigrate. It's why I generally have a good opinion of lawmaking that helps people gain entry--my forebears and my husbands' family were all about work. I like to think most people lured by the promise of America are beguiled by our opportunities to get gainful employment.

That this country can also harbor criminals with ease is a damn shame. I think, in terms of the "Dreamers" or the child immigrants--I have a hard time turning them away--their situation is appalling generally and I can't just assume they are like child soldiers or something. As for the cartel influence in the Southwest and that tragedy--I don't think any immigration reform at all would ever amnesty criminals. I don't think any bleeding heart like mine would even stomach that. I just tend to separate my hopes for those kids from whatever extra-legal bullshit they had to go through. I can't blame the kids for that. I blame the actual criminals. But if we get kids at our borders--I can't see interning them and screwing with their little lives. It grates on whatever maternal nerves I even have. I can't blame them for the sins of their parents. I feel like if the US is in custody of minors, then the state can act like in loco parentis and act in the kids favor.

I don't know how to properly shut out the cartels, though. I know they opened up something like ratlines for the drug trade (tunneling) and even if we stepped up our border guards, some cross commerce would exist. I just doubt any immigration agreement would extend to greater toleration of those activities. As a "statist"--I kind of appreciate some degree of law and order--so I'd deliver those folks to whatever law enforcement might apply.